Marquis traded for Austin Croshere - Page 3 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Male30Dan · 07-05-2006, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aexchange

its not that we traded our 10th man. that really is materially irrelevant. its about the fact we traded our best 2, and were left stuck with crackhouse. this is a completely obvious salary dump from a multitude of levels.

croshere, stack both come off the books next season. and the talent isn't going to be replenished. the fact AJ is thinking about bringing in that nutcase mike james makes me want to root for a pathetic team like the craptors. at least there is hope on the horizon for them.

let's see, does this look like a checklist for a successful team?
- overpay and sign a 17pt game 6'3" 1/2 guard 29 year old to a 6 year, 50 million dollar contract.
- keep your most boneheaded idiot 2 guard on the roster who makes exactly zero people around him better.
- watch hornets trade pj brown and jr smith for chandler and instantly find someone who has a chance of guarding amare.
- prepare to offer a 3-5 year deal at the full MLE to a career spare who has had 1 successful season and then add him to the roster where you just signed a player to a 6 yr/50 mill deal, and also used a #5 pick on a player 2 years ago. by the way, did i mention he's not going to be able to stop any perimeter penetration?
- draft a 2 guard from college, tout him as a wade stopper, only to have spartan fans tell you that the first time he D's up, will be the first they've ever seen any evidence.
- our best utility man who can be had for cheap looks to be gone.
- we have the biggest giant stiff of a center who after 3 years still doesn't have a damn clue

our off season has amounted to more of the knicks than more of the mavs. this is an atrocious offseason. i've been a fan for ages now, and trust me, i can smell the shit storm when its coming to town. and we're in for a total stinker of a season.

Dallas made a fool of the Ape last year regarding his prediction and I imagine you get to be the fool for this year. Will you, like Ape, go on record suggesting the Mavs won't make the playoffs? Geez!

aexchange · 07-05-2006, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

I like you. I really do.

But every bit of this is just crap. Every bit.

what part of that was crap?

29 yr old terry being signed to a deal where we were bidding against ourselves?
stackhouse making people around him better?
smith and pj brown being dealt to the bulls for chandler when a stackhouse + daniels for chandler + spare makes some sense for everyone?
mike james isnt a career spare?
spartan fans being surprised that ager is called a defensive stopper?
no talk of griffin being resigned?
pavel is still a bum after 3 years?

i'm waiting. i really am. what part of that was incorrect?

aexchange · 07-05-2006, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Male23Dan

Dallas made a fool of the Ape last year regarding his prediction and I imagine you get to be the fool for this year. Will you, like Ape, go on record suggesting the Mavs won't make the playoffs? Geez!

no, its not that. they'll make the playoffs, but adding mike james to a team with crackhouse is like adding fuel to the fire. in this case, we're aren't going to burn brighter, we're on the path to implosion with those two idiots with ginormous egos.

one of the things that daniels does fairly well for a guard, is give you some length at the 2 spot and also allow you to hit the boards a bit more and not get killed. dropping daniels, adding james, dump van horn, add croshere still turns into a net loss on the boards, and daniels and james are a total wash on defense.

Rhylan · 07-05-2006, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhoistheman

Now, I might be totally wrong and if I am, I apologize, but isn't it possible that the Mavericks might have traded Daniels for Croshere because the Raptors would be more willing to S/T James for Croshere, who would be an expiring contract, than Daniels, who would eat up a bit more cap space for Toronto. Perhaps Toronto wanted to get something else for Mike James than Daniels, and Croshere is what they wanted. Not saying this is the case, perhaps a little bit of wishful thinking.

All supposing that James is signed:

I dunno, I just hope this isn't an indicator that they really plan on playing JT and possibly James THAT much at the 2 with Stack. This to me, if no other backcourt moves are made, indicates to me that James will be here to keep JET off the 1 and do some of the things at the 2 that we wanted Marquis to do.

Which basically means at the 2-guard, you have JET who is 6'1" with thick soled shoes, James who is listed at 6'2" (which probably means he's same size as JET), and Stack who's really about 6'4" and change, and not a spring chicken.

Big problem on the boards, problem on D against big guards.

aexchange · 07-05-2006, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locked_Up_Tonight

If Quis was the best shooting guard why did he not play in the playoffs?

That's the part I don't get. People are moaaning about this trade because the Mavs gave up mucho talent in Daniels for Croshere. SO WHAT? How much talent of Daniels got to play in the playoffs? And Daniels was definitely healthy in the playoffs.

If Daniels was never going to play for this team why are you so upset about him leaving?

that i can't answer. i can tell you there's probably more value out there to be had for daniels than croshere.

i like croshere, but he's the kind of guy you sign to fill out of the bottom of your roster. regardless of how you want to spin it, the team that gets the best player in a trade usually comes out the winner, and daniels is by far the best player in this trade.

XERXES · 07-05-2006, 10:39 PM

YES!!! Less tats!!! I'm all for it!!!

Locked_Up_Tonight · 07-05-2006, 10:40 PM

Quote:

one of the things that daniels does fairly well for a guard, is give you some length at the 2 spot and also allow you to hit the boards a bit more and not get killed. dropping daniels, adding james, dump van horn, add croshere still turns into a net loss on the boards, and daniels and james are a total wash on defense.

That's great. IN THEORY. But that would mean Marquis would have to play. And the only time Marquis played last year was when someone was hurt. So this bemoanment over Marquis is truly like the tree falling in the forest.

jthig32 · 07-05-2006, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aexchange

what part of that was crap?

29 yr old terry being signed to a deal where we were bidding against ourselves?
stackhouse making people around him better?
smith and pj brown being dealt to the bulls for chandler when a stackhouse + daniels for chandler + spare makes some sense for everyone?
mike james isnt a career spare?
spartan fans being surprised that ager is called a defensive stopper?
no talk of griffin being resigned?
pavel is still a bum after 3 years?

i'm waiting. i really am. what part of that was incorrect?

Marquis is not our best 2.

How did we bid against ourselves on Terry when we barely gave him a raise over his old contract? That was a home town discount.

I'm not a huge Stackhouse fan, I'll give you that one.

I fail to see how the Bulls/Hornets trade have anything to do with us. I love when people think that we "missed" a deal of some sort, and they think they could have come up with a better deal. I assure you, if we could have had Chandler for Stackhouse and Daniels we would have. You WAY overrate Daniels value if you're comparing him to J.R. Smith.

Mike James is a VERY good career backup point guard. I have reservations about his contract, but I'm very happy with signing him.

The Ager as a defender thing..whatever. College D is far different than the pros. Could be spin.

Why should resigning Griff be a priority?

PPod is a complete spare, I agree.

Ok, it's not ALL crap. Mainly I just don't see how trading Marquis for Crosher, resigning JET, and signing James (maybe) makes for a crappy offseason and means we're in trouble. We're a young team that was in the Finals last year, why do we need an overhaul?

jthig32 · 07-05-2006, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aexchange

that i can't answer. i can tell you there's probably more value out there to be had for daniels than croshere.

i like croshere, but he's the kind of guy you sign to fill out of the bottom of your roster. regardless of how you want to spin it, the team that gets the best player in a trade usually comes out the winner, and daniels is by far the best player in this trade.

Marquis filled out the bottom of OUR roster. Marquis is not a "far better player" than anyone in this league. He's just not. At lest not yet.

XERXES · 07-05-2006, 10:43 PM

Seriously though, I am SHOCKED at how much some of you are overvalueing Daniels. You're acting like he was an integral part of this team (he was not,) you're acting like he was a reliable presence on the court (he was not,) you're acting like he mattered on this team (he did not.) He was a LIABILITY. Whenever he was in the game with Dirk - Dirk suffered. Nobody had to guard Daniels on the weakside perimeter...so Dirk ALWAYS got double-teamed!

I literally cannot believe the lack of basketball common sense many of you are displaying.

Ridiculous.

Bookit · 07-05-2006, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locked_Up_Tonight

If Quis was the best shooting guard why did he not play in the playoffs?

The question should be.."did Marquis produce when given the chance to play in the playoffs?"

jthig32 · 07-05-2006, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bookit

The question should be.."did Marquis produce when given the chance to play in the playoffs?"

And the answer would be no, until the final game of the Finals.

dude1394 · 07-05-2006, 10:45 PM

At least no more posts about how AJ hates Marquis and if he were only given the chance he would show how good he was. Even though he didn't.

Bookit · 07-05-2006, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XERXES

Seriously though, I am SHOCKED at how much some of you are overvalueing Daniels. You're acting like he was an integral part of this team (he was not,) you're acting like he was a reliable presence on the court (he was not,) you're acting like he mattered on this team (he did not.) He was a LIABILITY. Whenever he was in the game with Dirk - Dirk suffered. Nobody had to guard Daniels on the weakside perimeter...so Dirk ALWAYS got double-teamed!

I literally cannot believe the lack of basketball common sense many of you are displaying.

Ridiculous.

Hopefully Avery knows best but Daniels is young with lots of room for improvement. He scored 30 points multiple times his rookie season when given big minutes. Throwing him away for nothing pisses me off.

aexchange · 07-05-2006, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Marquis is not our best 2.

How did we bid against ourselves on Terry when we barely gave him a raise over his old contract? That was a home town discount.

who else was going to sign him?

Quote:

I'm not a huge Stackhouse fan, I'll give you that one.

he's terrible, we both agree with that

Quote:

I fail to see how the Bulls/Hornets trade have anything to do with us. I love when people think that we "missed" a deal of some sort, and they think they could have come up with a better deal. I assure you, if we could have had Chandler for Stackhouse and Daniels we would have. You WAY overrate Daniels value if you're comparing him to J.R. Smith.

i'm not saying that we could have traded stackhouse for chandler, i'm just saying that the impetus for that kind of deal was there. you're probably overrating smith here since he did almost get traded for brent barry. this was a total salary dump by the bulls.

Quote:

Mike James is a VERY good career backup point guard. I have reservations about his contract, but I'm very happy with signing him.

he also whined about being the third banana to yao and tmac during his time in houston. how's he going to fit in here? the talent, i'm fine with. hes a total mental headcase though which doesnt make it too cool

Quote:

The Ager as a defender thing..whatever. College D is far different than the pros. Could be spin.

we'll have to see something out of ager.

Quote:

Why should resigning Griff be a priority?

what other utility player do we have that is willing to do the dirty work and not take any shots? what other player do we have who can be had for cheap, defends fairly well, and rebounds effectively?

Quote:

PPod is a complete spare, I agree.

yes, he sucks. ppod is the suck.

Quote:

Ok, it's not ALL crap. Mainly I just don't see how trading Marquis for Crosher, resigning JET, and signing James (maybe) makes for a crappy offseason and means we're in trouble. We're a young team that was in the Finals last year, why do we need an overhaul?

my big problem is that the team seriously lacked bball IQ coming out of the finals. so what do we do? we sign arguably the dumbest player on the market to a 3-5 year deal at the full MLE. real smooth.

like a laxative.

Rhylan · 07-05-2006, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bookit

Hopefully Avery knows best but Daniels is young with lots of room for improvement. He scored 30 points multiple times his rookie season when given big minutes. Throwing him away for nothing pisses me off.

Me, too, but that's more a product of my dislike for Croshere.

With Marquis.. get him for nothing, send him off for nothing. Easy come, easy go.

Big Shot Rob · 07-05-2006, 10:52 PM

I think there would have been a game 7 if Marquis had played more in game 6.

Dtownsfinest · 07-05-2006, 10:53 PM

Read some of the posts but didn't get around to all of them. I hate his f'in trade. I hate it. I don't care how many years Croshere has on his contract. We gave Daniels away and this Chroshere in return. I'd rather have KVH to be honest. His bigger and when his back isn't against the wall he can score and let me be the first to say I can't stand KVH either.

Someone please inform me why we did this. Did we do it to get money off our cap? Or was it done to use as trade bait since he only has 1 year left on his contract? If so, why didn't we trade KVH's horrible contract when it had 1 year on it? I knew Marquis wasn't a fan favorite in the Dallas organization. I knew it when he couldn't buy time until we had our backs against the wall. And I co-sign with Aexchange when he says Daniels is our best 2. He was. He was our only consistent scorer at the 2 spot and he had the best defense out of all of them. And we trade Croshere for him. The only explanation there is for this move is that the Croshere for Mike James deal is a done deal and now i'm not even sure if i'd prefer Mike James over Daniels. I still saw potential in Marquis if given time.

Locked_Up_Tonight · 07-05-2006, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Someone please inform me why we did this.

Bottom line:

Marquis Daniels-3 years-18 million-won't ever play.

Austin Croshere-1 year-7 million-will play backup 4.

That's it.

jthig32 · 07-05-2006, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aexchange

who else was going to sign him?

he's terrible, we both agree with that

i'm not saying that we could have traded stackhouse for chandler, i'm just saying that the impetus for that kind of deal was there. you're probably overrating smith here since he did almost get traded for brent barry. this was a total salary dump by the bulls.

he also whined about being the third banana to yao and tmac during his time in houston. how's he going to fit in here? the talent, i'm fine with. hes a total mental headcase though which doesnt make it too cool

we'll have to see something out of ager.

what other utility player do we have that is willing to do the dirty work and not take any shots? what other player do we have who can be had for cheap, defends fairly well, and rebounds effectively?

yes, he sucks. ppod is the suck.

my big problem is that the team seriously lacked bball IQ coming out of the finals. so what do we do? we sign arguably the dumbest player on the market to a 3-5 year deal at the full MLE. real smooth.

like a laxative.

There were several teams out there with cap room that needed a PG, namely the Hawks. I have zero problem with Terry's deal. And I'm not a huge fan of Terry. I think he's good, not perfect for this team. But I have no problem with the contract.

On the utility player, I think we might still sign Griff, but no one's beating down his door. No hurry I don't think. Isn't Buckner free as well? You can find the glue guys I think.

Bookit · 07-05-2006, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locked_Up_Tonight

Bottom line:

Marquis Daniels-3 years-18 million-won't ever play.

Austin Croshere-1 year-7 million-will play backup 4.

That's it.

Ager better pan out and there better be someone else on the way because you know Stack will be injured half of next season. Croshere will only play the minutes KVH played so nothing has really changed there.

jthig32 · 07-05-2006, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bookit

Ager better pan out and there better be someone else on the way because you know Stack will be injured half of next season. Croshere will only play the minutes KVH played so nothing has really changed there.

You're complaining about Stack always being injured, and you wanted to keep Marquis? Really?

#1MavsFan · 07-05-2006, 11:01 PM

I think we're going to end up regretting this big time. Marquis has potential and has shown a lot of signs until he got hurt. He than again stepped up in game 6 of the finals when no one else did. Are we forgetting what he's done when he actually got playing time? He's scored over 30 a couple times, and was our 2nd best player in that Sac series a couple years ago.

Croshere is a spare who has reached his mediocre ceiling. What a horrible trade. We could have traded Marquis for a mid 1rst round pick from all the reports that were out there but instead we get KVH v2?

wow, can't believe this.

Big Boy Laroux · 07-05-2006, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

PacerTom: "Look at your own Keith Van Horn and imagine him a little stronger. Probably a little slower too, but generally healthy (before the 2 concussions) and a smart guy who is probably good in the locker room too."

Jjbjjbjjb: "Croshere looked like a true veteran leader this year. I think if nothing else you get a great locker-room guy and a guy who wants to win.

DisplaceKnick "About the same as what's been said - lunch-pail type. Has been benched and had uncertain minutes at times in his career and never complained. Good rebounder. Works his tail off on D but not quick enough to defend most SF's and has a hard time bodying up the real power players though he's gotten better. And I'd call him an intelligent defender.

Good guy, smart player and if a coach uses him right he can really help a team. If a coach doesn't use him right everyone will hate him (see Isiah Thomas)."

well, these are promising quotes.

Bookit · 07-05-2006, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

You're complaining about Stack always being injured, and you wanted to keep Marquis? Really?

Really.

Did Marquis fill in when Stack was out and vise versa? It works because Marquis always stepped it up when givin starters minutes.

Chicken Diavlo · 07-05-2006, 11:08 PM

So, wait... Mike James is a done deal?

MFFL · 07-05-2006, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

Even if Booth's was a year longer than Keith's, Henderson's contract was ending at the end of the year. So we tied the salaries of two players, one of which was ending at the end of the year, into one player, for another year.

How is this hard to understand?

http://probasketball.about.com/od/ne...trades05_3.htm

Mavericks get Keith Van Horn, SF/PF, 10.4 points | 5.0 rebounds | 1 year, $15.7 million left on contract at Van Horn's option

Bucks get Alan Henderson, PF, 3.5 points | 4.5 rebounds | Free agent this offseason
Calvin Booth, C, 2.4 points | 1.7 rebounds | 2 years, $13.1 million left on contract

The Bucks were dumping salary and gave away Van Horn. But the Mavs total salary committment only increased an extra $2.6M for the deal. That's not very significant - especially since it took place a year and a half ago.

Locked_Up_Tonight · 07-05-2006, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Really.

Did Marquis fill in when Stack was out and vise versa? It works because Marquis always stepped it up when givin starters minutes.

And had Avery had Adrian Griffin from day 1 Marquis wouldn't even had started.

Face it... as soon as Griff came (you know the guy that was sitting on the couch eating popcorn and watching the Mavs) Marquis rarely saw the court again for major minutes.

(And btw, perhaps the Mavs have more hope with Rawle Marshall than they do Marquis. He's younger, cheaper, and has just as much upside._

thewillis12 · 07-05-2006, 11:14 PM

i really wish we could have kept him i liked the potential lineup:
Terry
Daniels
Howard
Dirk
Diop

i've always thought that daniels should have started.........then again........welcome austin?

kenny9 · 07-05-2006, 11:16 PM

i think this trade is alright. couple of things...1. its safe to say KVH is probs out

Daniels he'll get an opportunity in Indiana and thats good for him..

Croshere..i've seen him lite it up..hopefully this being a contract year and can like make him lite it up more

aexchange · 07-05-2006, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jthig32

There were several teams out there with cap room that needed a PG, namely the Hawks. I have zero problem with Terry's deal. And I'm not a huge fan of Terry. I think he's good, not perfect for this team. But I have no problem with the contract.

On the utility player, I think we might still sign Griff, but no one's beating down his door. No hurry I don't think. Isn't Buckner free as well? You can find the glue guys I think.

you and i both know there was no chance in hell of terry going back to the hawks. there was a better chance of me landing a fantasy threesome with kate beckinsale and vanessa manillo than terry reupping with the hawks.

terry hated that place and there was no chance in hell of that happening.

dude1394 · 07-05-2006, 11:20 PM

Terrys deal was fair. It was fair for jason and it was fair for the mavs. I know the mavs could have played all hard-ass with him to what end, that he actually WOULD go to atlanta seeing how the team was trying to shaft him?

Or the take the money and not be committed. There is such a thing as a win-win negotiation and it looks like they hit it. Jason feels good and appreciated, mavs didn't overpay.

Rick41 · 07-05-2006, 11:23 PM

Well I'm pissed. Great way to end my night. I liked marquis. Just why for austin?!!

bsmit · 07-05-2006, 11:30 PM

Awful trade. Marquis has to have more value in the NBA than just Austin Croshere straight up. Thats absolutely ridiculous. Plus, Indiana has been trying to get rid of Croshere for years, he was their Chan Ho Park (for the Ranger fans), so Dallas could have gotten more out of this trade

jthig32 · 07-05-2006, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MFFL

http://probasketball.about.com/od/ne...trades05_3.htm

Mavericks get Keith Van Horn, SF/PF, 10.4 points | 5.0 rebounds | 1 year, $15.7 million left on contract at Van Horn's option

Bucks get Alan Henderson, PF, 3.5 points | 4.5 rebounds | Free agent this offseason
Calvin Booth, C, 2.4 points | 1.7 rebounds | 2 years, $13.1 million left on contract

The Bucks were dumping salary and gave away Van Horn. But the Mavs total salary committment only increased an extra $2.6M for the deal. That's not very significant - especially since it took place a year and a half ago.

You asked for the last time we took on a more expensive contract in a trade. I answered, now you're qualifying it.

I really should just stop arguing. You equated Cuban with Sterling, which shows you have no sense.

nashtymavsfan13 · 07-05-2006, 11:31 PM

You've gotta be kidding me!

We couldv'e gotten a lot more for Quisy. Ugh.

EricaLubarsky · 07-05-2006, 11:32 PM

Good trade. Period. KVH won't be back. Everyone here wanted a backup PF for Dirk-- a blue-collar, grit-it-out guy with some offense to keep things going. Thats what we got.

Now everyone was down on Daniels-- the guy hadn't contributed since he signed his contract. He was potential without a lick of contribution, unless you count 5 luck minutes in game 6.

The real reason everyone was so high on Daniels, though, is the unsubstantiated reports that Daniels was worth a lot more than he was really worth in a trade. The guy had an albatross contract and no production.

when you trade away a guy with an unfortunate contract, you aren't going to get full talent-value, and we got a good player and addressed our needs, which is about the best of all possibilities.

+Croshere is a guy that won't mind backing Dirk
+Croshere will effectively stop all the Kmart talk
+he's a good chemistry guy
+he will bring his lunchbox and his blue-collared jumpsuit.
+he's an 11.1rebounds per 48 guy-- not bad for the number 2 power forward. (KVH was 8.5rp48 last year)
+he's an efficient scorer as a second, third or fourth option, which is what he'll be with Dirk out.
+fewer turnovers, fewer mental errors...

jleefilled · 07-05-2006, 11:33 PM

So long to 'Quis. I guess we all kind of expected Daniels to get moved, but I'm not sure anyone saw Croshere as a possibility. My initial impression is kind of even on this deal. I'm probably bias, though, because I like Quis. Eventhough he never really replicated what he showed toward the end of his rookie season, the guy kind of grew on me. Croshere = stronger, younger, KVH? Sounds pretty good to me.

dude1394 · 07-05-2006, 11:33 PM

Erica...you are a genious. Very nice post and wrap-up.

jleefilled · 07-05-2006, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

Now everyone was down on Daniels-- the guy hadn't contributed since he signed his contract. He was potential without a lick of contribution, unless you count 5 luck minutes in game 6.

I don't see how you can say that he didn't contribute at all except for 5 luck minutes. Are you serious? He started much of the first half of the season.